Questions regarding the OT levels and OT states of being.....When I entered Scientology in 1981, I met many of the local OTs and they were generally impressive people. They always seemed centered, focused, and they also had qualities of compassion and sincerity that I thought were important. (As in, for anyone making genuine spiritual gain I would expect them to be feeling and showing more love and compassion for those around them). There were definitely a few of them who seemed somewhat 'otherworldly', in that they seemed to be able to cause changes in their life, or they had remarkable perceptions, or something of that order. There was one OT7 who, if I approached him to talk to him about some problem I had, as soon as I got within a couple of meters of him I would key out and my problem would dissipate completely. Then I noticed, sometime after 1985 or so, that people were coming back from doing OT levels and they were not winning, they did not seem to change or evolve as beings in any noticeable way. One of these people was my wife, she did her OT levels around 1987 and she seemed embarrassed about them, she could not maintain eye contact with me when I mentioned the subject and she shared NO wins whatsoever with me. I reached the state of Clear, and I had great wins from that, but I have not done any OT levels. Unfortunately I also missed out on doing the Scientology Grades. So I have continued to wonder about the OT levels. In my own research I have read some of the work of Ingo Swann, who completed up to OT7 and who did seem to gain some OT abilities, to the extent that the CIA employed him in various projects. Though I note that he attributed many of his wins to the Scientology Grades. I am trying to gauge, what is the reality of this group regarding the OT levels? Are they of any value at all? Were the OT levels changed and devalued by DM in such a way as to lose most of their value? Is there any definitive source of information about these issues?

Scott Gordon:People like SkyBunny take advantage of the fact that people don't do their research. Sorry, but this person behind a fake name is not dealing in truth.

So long as there is mystery, we will fall for incredible dub-in regarding these levels.

The OT levels are really not that mysterious. Refer to the Otto Roos story and you find that Otto helped LRH pilot OTVIII back in 1969.

None of the original levels have been altered.

Different groups of Standard Tech Indies have analyzed versions of NOTs and found David Mayo's reconstructions accurate and therefore RonsOrgs assertions that NOTs was altered is simply not true. The church has since altered NOTs, but the version in the field that we all have, is correct.

Same goes for original OT levels. No one who did the original OT levels has ever asserted alteration.

But Randy McDonald (who writes as "Ashton Gray") believes that these levels were switched. This simply does not match the accounts of people who were there developing this stuff (Otto Roos, David Mayo, John McMaster, etc.).

Otto Roos observed notes about OT levels through "19" - back when he reviewed LRH's folders in 1972.

But think about this for a moment. Do you think that if it took a whole year to develop the Ls based on Geoffrey Filbert's Expanded Dianetics development - that those notes from 1969 were complete levels or were not used to finish the Ls and finish OT VIII? Or that they are that much different from Captain Bill's later development (remember Capt Bill was there in those days, too, but I am not saying that his levels are correct - only that he later applied what he learned from LRH).

The reconstructed OT VIII version we have in the Freezone volume matches the version posted by Karen Spaink in the affidavit versions confirmed by RTC. What are we to think of that? I looked that over and found it to be the only write-up besides the original OT levels that makes sense.

So a lot more information is out there in the public domain. There is enough to tell me that although OT VIII is still uncertain, none of the other levels are. We have them. The question is are they worthwhile and what is the best order to do them in.

I'll make a separate post about what I am going to do personally, as "upper levels."

Before you go any further however, I suggest reading Dennis Stephens' Resolution of the Mind for theory beyond any other Bridge. I don't think he took the practical application to a broadly workable conclusion, but he found the mistakes in GPM research and NOTs and you definitely need to know these things.